Advice on 9th level Monk doing 6d6 damage per strike...

[Enkhidu]

I think this is one of those instances where RAW isn't as useful as a quick judgement call.

Personally, I'd nix the "Goliath = large for the purposes of unarmed strike, but allow everything else. However, since the benefit provided by the Fanged Ring is effectively the same as that provided by INA, I'd rule that they were overlapping bonuses that didn't stack (much like Keen and Imp Crit don't stack). That'd leave the PC with 3d6 worth of damage per successful strike (which 'taint half-bad).

As for allowing two-weapon with fluirry of blows, I think that its a sub-optimal choice for the PC - +9/+9/+9/+4 should be good enough. +7/+7/+7/+7/+2 is really more like "flurry of misses" waiting to happen.

 

[KarinsDad]

The Goliath large damage some down to to things:

1. It's not mentioned speifcally, so no large damage need apply.

or

2. It's implied, and not actually permiited or denied, so it can be granted.

Either way is fine, really. It depends upon how much you read into the description. Either you go with the fact that it was not mentioned and therefore cannot be allowed or you decide the general intention is there and allow it.

*shrug* Up to you as DM to decide on that one. You can decide that it was written up very carefuilly and left out natural attacks deliberately or decide it was an oversight and should have been included and is indeed included, by implication.

The "powerful build" grants certain things and denies others (size and reach), but makes no mention of natural attacks. But, then again, half-giants (powerful build) don't have a natural attack, so one would not expect it to be mentioned.

This concept that if something is not explicitly mentioned, it could or should be allowed is very bizarre from a rules or RAW perspective.

For example, assuming that Monks have Natural Weapons in the first place. Or assuming that being allowed to use a weapon designed for larger creatures means that an Unarmed Strike can be larger.

I prefer Hyp's definition of RAW. If it says it somewhere, it's allowed. This "maybe, sort of, it's kind of similar, it must be the intent because it is similar" stuff is not RAW. It's extrapolation.

 

[Artoomis]

This concept that if something is not explicitly mentioned, it could or should be allowed is very bizarre from a rules or RAW perspective.

For example, assuming that Monks have Natural Weapons in the first place. Or assuming that being allowed to use a weapon designed for larger creatures means that an Unarmed Strike can be larger.

I prefer Hyp's definition of RAW. If it says it somewhere, it's allowed. This "maybe, sort of, it's kind of similar, it must be the intent because it is similar" stuff is not RAW. It's extrapolation.

It does not really matter so much if you call it RAW or exprapolation, it's about whether it should be allowed.

In this case, the Goliath has no natural attacks, so leaving it out could very well have been an oversight. If you take this view, than a monk's attack goes up one size. If you take the stricter view that if it was mentioned you don't get it, period, then you would not allow it.

Easy as pie.

 

[irdeggman]

Do Goliaths have reach?

Larger HD?

Pay more for equipment?

These are characteristics of Large creatures.

 

[Cedric]

Just on the subject of INA...

From the PHB, a monk's unarmed strike "is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either."

As to INA..

Choose one of the creature’s natural attack forms. The damage for this natural weapon increases by one step, as if the creature’s size had increased by one category: 1d2, 1d3, 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6.

A weapon or attack that deals 1d10 points of damage increases as follows: 1d10, 2d8, 3d8, 4d8, 6d8, 8d8, 12d8.

This feat may be taken multiple times, but each time it applies to a different natural attack.

From that it seems clear to me that INA is explicitly allowed by the rules.

 

[Thanee]

(i.e. nobody adds INA to their PC when it goes from 1D6 to 1D8 and it is just one average extra point of damage, they add it when they go from 1D8 to 2D6 or greater when it is 2.5 or 3.5 average extra points of damage).

That's exactly where 'nobody' added it, and that won't change, therefore it remains true.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

From that it seems clear to me that INA is explicitly allowed by the rules.

It's actually explicitly disallowed, because monks (of 'normal' races) cannot fulfill the prerequisite.

Being treated as a natural weapon implies that it is not a natural weapon, which also matches other rules, like the iterative attacks from high BAB, which you do gain with unarmed strikes, but not with natural weapons.

Improved Natural Attack requires a natural weapon to be taken (Prerequisite: natural weapon).

A goliath monk has no natural weapons and thus cannot take this feat (per the RAW).

Bye
Thanee

 

[Artoomis]

Do Goliaths have reach?

Larger HD?

Pay more for equipment?

These are characteristics of Large creatures.

See post number 10.

They have some characteristics of large creatures, and not others.

 

[Artoomis]

...From that it seems clear to me that INA is explicitly allowed by the rules.

It's actually explicitly disallowed, because monks (of 'normal' races) cannot fulfill the prerequisite.

Let's not go there. Been discussed ad nauseum before, this is not the place for that discussion.

 

[Cedric]

Let's not go there. Been discussed ad nauseum before, this is not the place for that discussion.

Odd, it seemed precisely the place for the discussion.